Casey +7

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

How we trade one of them for Coleman and the other for Santorum? That'd make me, Flyers, and you all very happy.

No thanks. 

alright, compromise, Coleman for Specter.

[Keystone Phil]

How we trade one of them for Coleman and the other for Santorum? That'd make me, Flyers, and you all very happy.

No thanks. 

alright, compromise, Coleman for Specter.

Fine with me!

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

you know, interestingly if Casey wins Pennsylvania will have a pro-life Democrat and pro-choice Republican for its Senate delegation. I wonder if any other state has had that combo before.

[AuH2O]

It appears more people are thinking about this race rationally, or, in other words, how I've seen it from day 1.

According to the same poll Lynn Swann is only down 6 to Rendell, and considering his name rec and or favorability is probably not that stellar in the Philly area, that's pretty good. Or the poll is pretty bad, which I think it is.

A lot of money is going to be spent on this Senate race but turnout will obviously be far short of 2004 (by virtue of being an off-election). The bottom line is that Santorum has produced in every race... he's like Louisville. No respect, but at the end of the day they beat Georgia Tech all the same.

Now, this is going to be ugly. Like I said when Casey declared, if you think Santorum is just going to skip around with a parasol singing like Mary Poppins you're delusional-- he is going to take it right to Casey, and his resources are essentially unlimited.

Santorum has already been working on repositioning himself. I wouldn't be surprised if pictures of him next to Hillary Clinton a couple weeks ago emerged on ads in the Philly 'burbs. In the burbs, he'll ram Casey's populism down voters' throats, and in rural areas he'll assault Casey's social credentials. Santorum will be endorsed by the NRA because he's the incumbent, and Casey has not staked out ground on gay marriage so far as I am aware.

Your name only gets you so far, and Casey has never taken anything even remotely close to being in the same galaxy as what Santorum will unleash. Until he has proven he can take it, it's ridiculous to say he has some kind of "lead." His "lead" is like the lead UConn had in Vegas... looks great on paper, until reality crashes the party.

[Wakie]

I love the non-PA residents chiming in to tell us all about PA. 

This will be a tough race.  It will be the featured election of 2006.  Both parties are going to spend spend spend.  Both candidates are going to be VERY well known.

But at the end of the day Casey will win for these reasons:

1) He's a moderate Dem against an extreme Repub.  PA is a state of moderates.

2) Santorum has a record which the Dems can attack.

3) Casey is an extremely personable guy whereas Santorum can be a real dick (yes, I have met both).

[Keystone Phil]

I love the non-PA residents chiming in to tell us all about PA. 

This will be a tough race.  It will be the featured election of 2006.  Both parties are going to spend spend spend.  Both candidates are going to be VERY well known.

But at the end of the day Casey will win for these reasons:

1) He's a moderate Dem against an extreme Repub.  PA is a state of moderates.

2) Santorum has a record which the Dems can attack.

3) Casey is an extremely personable guy whereas Santorum can be a real dick (yes, I have met both).

Yet you fail to acknowledge that Santorum has a good amount of support among Pennsylvanians as a whole and even some Democrats like the guy.

By the way, Klink was more of a moderate Dem, too, in a state "full of moderates." Why couldn't he win? Sure money was an issue but if he was more in line with the people, why didn't he pull it out?

Also, you bring up non-PA residents telling us about PA (I guess you're talking specifically about AuH2O). I hope you realize there are plenty on your side doing it was well.

[Wakie]

I love the non-PA residents chiming in to tell us all about PA. 

This will be a tough race.  It will be the featured election of 2006.  Both parties are going to spend spend spend.  Both candidates are going to be VERY well known.

But at the end of the day Casey will win for these reasons:

1) He's a moderate Dem against an extreme Repub.  PA is a state of moderates.

2) Santorum has a record which the Dems can attack.

3) Casey is an extremely personable guy whereas Santorum can be a real dick (yes, I have met both).

Yet you fail to acknowledge that Santorum has a good amount of support among Pennsylvanians as a whole and even some Democrats like the guy.

By the way, Klink was more of a moderate Dem, too, in a state "full of moderates." Why couldn't he win? Sure money was an issue but if he was more in line with the people, why didn't he pull it out?

Also, you bring up non-PA residents telling us about PA (I guess you're talking specifically about AuH2O). I hope you realize there are plenty on your side doing it was well.

Oh, Santorum definitely has support in PA.  That's one reason why this is going to be such a tough race.  I won't deny that.

Klink was a moderate but he wasn't as defined of a moderate as Casey.  The Republicans painted Klink as a super-liberal.  AND this was 5 years ago, when Santorum's rep as an extremist wasn't built yet.  And lastly on this point, money was a definite issue for Klink.

My "non-PA residents" comment was intended to be a shot at ALL non-PA residents from both sides of the fence.  I find it amusing when someone (regardless of which side they are on) claims to know all about how the residents there will behave.  I certainly don't have any special insight into what motivates votes in New Mexico and I wouldn't want to pretend I did.

[Keystone Phil]

I love the non-PA residents chiming in to tell us all about PA. 

This will be a tough race.  It will be the featured election of 2006.  Both parties are going to spend spend spend.  Both candidates are going to be VERY well known.

But at the end of the day Casey will win for these reasons:

1) He's a moderate Dem against an extreme Repub.  PA is a state of moderates.

2) Santorum has a record which the Dems can attack.

3) Casey is an extremely personable guy whereas Santorum can be a real dick (yes, I have met both).

Yet you fail to acknowledge that Santorum has a good amount of support among Pennsylvanians as a whole and even some Democrats like the guy.

By the way, Klink was more of a moderate Dem, too, in a state "full of moderates." Why couldn't he win? Sure money was an issue but if he was more in line with the people, why didn't he pull it out?

Also, you bring up non-PA residents telling us about PA (I guess you're talking specifically about AuH2O). I hope you realize there are plenty on your side doing it was well.

Oh, Santorum definitely has support in PA.  That's one reason why this is going to be such a tough race.  I won't deny that.

Klink was a moderate but he wasn't as defined of a moderate as Casey.  The Republicans painted Klink as a super-liberal.  AND this 5 years ago, when Santorum's rep as an extremist wasn't built yet.  And lastly on this point, money was a definite issue for Klink.

Like many others, you seem to refuse to change your opinion on Santorum's stances. I don't see him as an extremist, you do. If he was that extreme, his approval ratings wouldn't be so good.

[AuH2O]

Well, there are what, 12 million people in PA? I doubt Wakie knows them all, or even a very significant portion of eligible voters. The sample he does know, as with most people in most places, is unlikely to be very representative for self-selecting reasons.

So in reality living in PA gives you only a slight benefit in terms of analysis, except for some people within the parties perhaps (if they have access to real polls, not the garbage publicized so far about this race).

In the 2000 race, fewer people voted for Senate (as is normal), yet Santorum got more total votes than Al Gore. Most voters do not follow politics as closely as members of this forum, and even in the case they do, are unlikely to consider Santorum "extreme," for a couple reasons:

1) He's not
2) His opposition to gay marriage is very clearly in line with the electorate. Pursuing that opposition effectively is thus not politically damaging.

As a pure candidate, Santorum actually has a lot of advantages, between incumbency, speaking, and probably money. In any reasonable formula Santorum comes out ahead. Casey's family fame is a wildcard but he has not been TOUCHED while Santorum has been under fire for years.

In the past couple years, Santorum has voted for some moderate gun control measures and also against accelerating the repeal of the estate tax (one of few Republicans to do so). He will position himself as a pragmatist on social and economic issues. Casey, I guess, could try to attack his position on gay marriage, since that is the only area where his rhetoric has been particularly sharp.

Casey could also campaign wearing a Patriots' hat, but neither idea is particularly brilliant. It shakes down like this:

Better fit for PA electorate:

Economic: Santorum

Social:
-Gay Marriage: Santorum
-Gun Control: Santorum (NRA endorsement is big)
-Abortion: draw

Clout: Santorum

So, basically, Casey has one advantage: his name; for some, because they loved his dad, for others, because his name is not Santorum.

note: if I was Santorum, I would hit Casey on judges. If Casey goes with Democrats in filibustering judges, pro-life judges won't be confirmed, thus negating Casey's value as a pro-lifer and keeping that vote with Santorum.
 

[Keystone Phil]

and Casey has not staked out ground on gay marriage so far as I am aware.

He favors Civil unions and is against FMA.

[AuH2O]

and Casey has not staked out ground on gay marriage so far as I am aware.

He favors Civil unions and is against FMA.

That counts as neutrality. I mean that's basically Bush's position.

Santorum has more cred on the issue.

[Moooooo]

note: if I was Santorum, I would hit Casey on judges. If Casey goes with Democrats in filibustering judges, pro-life judges won't be confirmed, thus negating Casey's value as a pro-lifer and keeping that vote with Santorum.
 

If I was Santorum I would hit Casey on his lack of interest in the U.S. Senate.  In reality Casey does NOT want the job.   He wants to be governor and everyone knows that.  He has already stated that he will not commit to serve a full term if elected.  That alone should make PA voters second guess voting for him.  I have a feeling alot of Democrats are going to be upset with the result of this race.  Im not holding my breath for a Casey victory, thats for sure.

[Keystone Phil]

note: if I was Santorum, I would hit Casey on judges. If Casey goes with Democrats in filibustering judges, pro-life judges won't be confirmed, thus negating Casey's value as a pro-lifer and keeping that vote with Santorum.
 

If I was Santorum I would hit Casey on his lack of interest in the U.S. Senate.  In reality Casey does NOT want the job.   He wants to be governor and everyone knows that.  He has already stated that he will not commit to serve a full term if he is elected to the senate.  That alone should make PA voters second guess voting for him.  I have a feeling alot of Democrats are going to be upset with the result of this race.  Im not holding my breath for a Casey victory, thats for sure.

I would bring that up, too, but you have to be very careful.

[12th Doctor]

note: if I was Santorum, I would hit Casey on judges. If Casey goes with Democrats in filibustering judges, pro-life judges won't be confirmed, thus negating Casey's value as a pro-lifer and keeping that vote with Santorum.
 

If I was Santorum I would hit Casey on his lack of interest in the U.S. Senate.  In reality Casey does NOT want the job.   He wants to be governor and everyone knows that.  He has already stated that he will not commit to serve a full term if elected.  That alone should make PA voters second guess voting for him.  I have a feeling alot of Democrats are going to be upset with the result of this race.  Im not holding my breath for a Casey victory, thats for sure.

I already mentioned that some time ago.  I think that the way Casey launched into this has hurt his credability.

He didn't run in '04 because, he said, he didn't want the job.  Now he turns around and runs, thus abandoning a job that he was voted and entrusted with by PA voters, including myself, and runs for a possition that he thinks will be a better stepping stone to the governorship, which everyone knows is what he really wants.

[Moooooo]

I already mentioned that some time ago.  I think that the way Casey launched into this has hurt his credability.

Awwwwwwww, You take credit for everything! 

[AuH2O]

Some Dems are actually more optimistic about RI, though I think they're jumping the gun there as well.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

though I think they're jumping the gun there as well.

[AuH2O]

though I think they're jumping the gun there as well.

Am I wrong?

I haven't predicted any races on EITHER SIDE.

Anyone who is is jumping the gun, I mean, in RI Dems haven't even had the primary yet.

Of course genius Al probably can tell us what will happen, he did so well in 2004...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Of course genius Al probably can tell us what will happen,

I've never claimed to be a genius and never will

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I only made a couple of serious predictions towards the end (and only Presidential. Didn't have time to do Congressional stuff, which is why I set the contest thingy up). My shock map was accurate (there were no shocks) and my final (and pretty much only serious) official prediction wasn't all that bad. I did a gut prediction and on reflection should have entered that instead (only got Wisconsin wrong) but that's life for you.

But I've never attacked anyone else for getting a prediction wrong and it'd be nice if everyone was polite like that.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

The Democrats shouldn't get too excited about this poll.  Casey was leading the Governor's race in 2001, but once the candidates actually started running ads, Rendell pulled away .  Of course, Casey is certainly a better candidate than Ron Klink, and Santorum has become a more polarizing figure since 2000.

[Keystone Phil]

The Democrats shouldn't get too excited about this poll.  Casey was leading the Governor's race in 2001, but once the candidates actually started running ads, Rendell pulled away .  Of course, Casey is certainly a better candidate than Ron Klink, and Santorum has become a more polarizing figure since 2000.

You view Santorum as a polarizing figure but he has some of the best approval ratings in the state and the lowest disapproval ratings. When you will guys understand that?

[Jake]

I got my Santorum 2006 contribution stuff today.  Have to get some early money together and have my parents send it in.  (Stupid regulations )

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

The Democrats shouldn't get too excited about this poll.  Casey was leading the Governor's race in 2001, but once the candidates actually started running ads, Rendell pulled away .  Of course, Casey is certainly a better candidate than Ron Klink, and Santorum has become a more polarizing figure since 2000.

You view Santorum as a polarizing figure but he has some of the best approval ratings in the state and the lowest disapproval ratings. When you will guys understand that?

Whatever his approval ratings are, I think it's hard to argue that Santorum isn't now more polarizing than he was five years ago.  When he ran for reelection in 2000, Santorum was just one of six or seven generic Republican Senators who won in 1994 that the Dems were trying to knock-off.  Since then, he has become a national symbol for the anti-gay movement.  What was Santorum's disapproval rating in 2000?  And even if he is just as popular in PA now as he was then, Santorum is polarizing on a national scale, such that his race will attract a lot more money and attention than it did then.

[bullmoose88]

note: if I was Santorum, I would hit Casey on judges. If Casey goes with Democrats in filibustering judges, pro-life judges won't be confirmed, thus negating Casey's value as a pro-lifer and keeping that vote with Santorum.
 

If I was Santorum I would hit Casey on his lack of interest in the U.S. Senate.  In reality Casey does NOT want the job.   He wants to be governor and everyone knows that.  He has already stated that he will not commit to serve a full term if elected.  That alone should make PA voters second guess voting for him.  I have a feeling alot of Democrats are going to be upset with the result of this race.  Im not holding my breath for a Casey victory, thats for sure.

I already mentioned that some time ago.  I think that the way Casey launched into this has hurt his credability.

He didn't run in '04 because, he said, he didn't want the job.  Now he turns around and runs, thus abandoning a job that he was voted and entrusted with by PA voters, including myself, and runs for a possition that he thinks will be a better stepping stone to the governorship, which everyone knows is what he really wants.

So you voted for him for treasurer too.

Don't you feel a little disappointed?


I think everyone knows my feelings about Rick. That aside, I've seen him speak in person. He's quite eloquent and intelligent. I found him to be rather impressive actually.

For Casey to only be up 7 right now, when all people know are Rick's negatives...well...those who are behind Casey right now (who knows, I might join them, or not...maybe I'll support Rick when its done)...better feel a little uncomfortable.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

To specify this a little more, if you look through Quinnipiac's polling history in Pennsylvania, you will see that Santorum's disapproval rating hovers around 30%, and has since his anti-gay marriage comments.  Prior to these comments, his disapproval was consistantly 20-22%.   Hence, he is clearly more polarizing now than he was when he last ran.